Find or Sell Used Cars, Trucks, and SUVs in USA

1969 Ford F-100 on 2040-cars

US $45,000.00
Year:1969 Mileage:28113
Location:

Houston, Texas, United States

Houston, Texas, United States
Advertising:
Transmission:Automatic
Vehicle Title:Clean
Year: 1969
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): F10YCE02406
Mileage: 28113
Make: Ford
Model: F-100
Condition: Used: A vehicle is considered used if it has been registered and issued a title. Used vehicles have had at least one previous owner. The condition of the exterior, interior and engine can vary depending on the vehicle's history. See the seller's listing for full details and description of any imperfections. See all condition definitions

Auto Services in Texas

Zoil Lube ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 3321 Fondren Rd, Fresno
Phone: (713) 783-2050

Young Chevrolet ★★★★★

New Car Dealers, Used Car Dealers
Address: 9301 E R L Thornton Fwy, Seagoville
Phone: (214) 328-9111

Yhs Automotive Service Center ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service
Address: 19831 Greenwind Chase Dr, Katy
Phone: (281) 944-9748

Woodlake Motors ★★★★★

Used Car Dealers
Address: 2416 N Frazier St, Dobbin
Phone: (936) 441-3500

Winwood Motor Co ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Gas Stations, Towing
Address: 4922 Graves Rd, Santa-Fe
Phone: (409) 925-2039

Wayne`s Car Care Inc ★★★★★

Auto Repair & Service, Automobile Parts & Supplies, Automobile Accessories
Address: 2725 S Cooper St, Richland-Hills
Phone: (817) 795-8436

Auto blog

Chevy says not to look at the 2019 Silverado's fuel economy rating

Tue, Nov 20 2018

The 2019 Chevy Silverado is hitting dealerships soon, and one of the most notable changes for the new full-size pickup is the addition of a 2.7-liter turbocharged inline-four. The engine replaces the naturally-aspirated 4.3-liter V6 in volume consumer models like the Silverado LT and promises more power, less weight and — most importantly — better fuel economy. The thing is, the gains in efficiency haven't been as dramatic as some might have hoped, especially when stacked up against competitors from Ford and Ram. As Automotive News reports, GM's response is a little murky. First, let's talk numbers. We're pulling all figures from FuelEconomy.gov, the official U.S. government source for fuel ratings. Fuel economy numbers on trucks vary greatly based on a number of factors. Bed and cab configuration play a part, but so does a four-wheel-drive system. You also have to factor in tires, transmissions, rear-axle gearing, hybrid systems and cylinder deactivation. Things like that can make the difference between best- and worst-in-class. The EPA's website doesn't give enough information a lot of the time, so there's really no easy way to compare apples-to-apples. First, take a look at the ratings for the 2019 Silverado. A 2.7-liter model with two-wheel drive is rated 20 city, 23 highway and 21 combined. That's both better and worse than a two-wheel drive 2018 Silverado with the 4.3-liter V6 (18 city, 24 highway and 20 combined). The updated 2019 Silverado with a 4.3-liter V6 has yet to be rated. With less weight and a smaller engine, many hoped Chevy would make bigger gains. It's unusual to see any decrease in a fuel economy metric these days. GM says that it's not done tuning the new 2.7-liter engine, so fuel economy could theoretically increase. Expanding further, a V8-powered 2019 Silverado (17 city, 24 highway and 19 combined) actually gets better highway fuel economy than a turbocharged four-cylinder powered truck in certain configurations, even if the latter has a better overall average. But that's only with two-wheel drive, the 8-speed transmission and cylinder deactivation. A Silverado with the 5.3-liter V8 and a 6-speed automatic is rated at 15 city, 22 highway and 17 combined. The biggest issue with the Silverado 2.7-liter doesn't come from within GM itself but from Ford and Ram. GM cites the Ford F-150 with the 3.3-liter V6 and the Ram 1500 with the 3.6-liter V6 as the closest competitors to its new 2.7-liter inline-four.

Tesla Model Y and Cadillac CT5 | Autoblog Podcast #573

Fri, Mar 22 2019

In this week's Autoblog Podcast, Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore is joined by Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski and Associate Editor Joel Stocksdale. They catch up on the Tesla Model Y, as well as the Cadillac CT5 and the brand's new naming structure. Afterward they talk about our driving the 2019 Mazda3, 2019 Volkswagen Golf GTI and 2019 Ford Ranger. Finally, the three editors take a lap around eBay looking for the best ways to spend $15,000 on a car. Autoblog Podcast #573 Get The Podcast iTunes – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Rundown Tesla Model Y unveiled Cadillac CT5 and Cadillac's new badging strategy Cars we're driving: 2019 Mazda3 2019 VW Golf GTI 2019 Ford Ranger How we'd spend $15,000 on eBay Feedback Email – Podcast@Autoblog.com Review the show on iTunes Related Video:

Consumer Reports: Ford Fusion fun but flawed; Mitsubishi i-MiEV slow, chintzy [w/videos]

Wed, 23 Jan 2013

Waiting for a Ford compliment from Consumer Reports these days is like waiting for a low-cost new product from Apple. So we weren't really expecting a glowing review of the 2013 Ford Fusion when CR got its hands on the car. The institute's crew bought three different versions of the Fusion (Hybrid, 1.6-liter EcoBoost and a Titanium with the 2.0-liter EcoBoost) to put through its barrage of tests, and while we aren't too surprised by some of the findings, they're still interesting nonetheless.
CR praises the Fusion for its "eye-catching" design and says that the sportier Titanium trim level is the best-handling midsize sedan they've ever tested, but that's about where the good news ends for Ford. The Fusion Hybrid also posted the best-ever fuel economy CR has recorded in a midsize sedan, but the only problem is that their number was 39 miles per gallon combined - far less than Ford's 47 mpg rating for city, highway and combined. As expected, CR also dinged the Fusion for its MyFord Touch, but some of the other gripes about the car include a cramped cabin and poor fit and finish.
Other Ford products tested this time around include the Focus Electric and C-Max Hybrid. Like the Fusion, CR's observed fuel economy of 37 mpg for the C-Max fell well short of Ford's advertised 47-mpg rating, and both cars were criticized for the use of MyFord Touch. CR notes that the Focus Electric's interior is also cramped, with the battery pack taking up a lot of cargo space.